She won the Texas primary. Obama won the Texas caucus. Obama ended up with slightly more delegates.

*******************************

She won the battle, but lost the war.

But... but... but she carried all the "big" states -- all the "important" states...

How much would anyone care to bet that, if Hillary doesn't get the nomination, there'll be some big legal huffing and puffing? 

The next question, Scott, is why are you so hot on her?  What is it about Hillary that makes you want her so badly? 

Hot on her?  So badly?  You completely misunderstand.  I'm not. 

I voted for Clinton in the primary but I wasn't voting *for* Clinton.  I was voting *against* Obama.  If Clinton gets the nomination then I still won't be voting *for* Clinton, but will instead be voting *against* McCain.  If Obama gets the nod then I won't be voting *for* McCain but instead will be voting *against* Obama.  It's sad when you are forced to vote against someone because there is no one worth voting for.

She is the lesser of 3 evils with McCain being in the middle of the pac (and I don't literally mean evil).  Obama is so extremely liberal.  I don't want someone that liberal in the White House any more than I want an extreme right wing conservative in there.  Clinton and McCain are more moderate with Clinton leaning left and McCain leaning right.

How much would anyone care to bet that, if Hillary doesn't get the nomination, there'll be some big legal huffing and puffing? 

I don't see her doing that at all.  If she doesn't get the nomination, there is zero doubt in my mind that McCain will win, and by a landslide.  She'll just wait 4 years and run again when Obama won't get a shot at running again because he will be seen as damaged goods since he will have ran and lost previously.

Ok, since we're both playing this too coy and obtuse and both dropping too many talking points, let me clear this up, Christopher...

It's a shame that what the Democratic party in Florida and Michigan did served to disenfranchise thier voters in terms of the primary elections.

Having said that, they knew the situation - that the states had broken the rules and therefore, would not be counted at the convention, when they voted.

Mike -- I actually blame the DNC.  I think they assumed that Hillary was going to run the table and the wouldn't need Michigan and Florida.  So they chose a overly strict penalty.  But even if their assumption were true wasn't it kind of stupid?  Aren't these huge states with many "swing" voters, voters who may see little substantive difference between Clinton and McCain, but probably like McCain more?  Doesn't it make sense, with an eye toward November, NOT to disenfranchise the electorate?  This was Howard Dean trying to prove he could wave a big stick.  Well, good job Howard. 

So I think the headache the DNC is now facing and the very real potential of a schism within the party is a monster of the DNC's own creation.  Obama's mistake, for what its worth, was that he played by the rules.  He was a good Democrat.  As anyone with any sense of recent political history knows the Clinton's don't do that.  Shit, Hillary had campaign offices and signs in Florida and Michigan.  She visited the states.  As bad as that is I keep coming back to Howard Dean (who as head of the DNC gets the blame) -- why did he pick such a severe penalty in a presidental election year?

Obama's mistake, for what its worth, was that he played by the rules.

To be honest, this is perhaps the biggest reason I LIKE Obama.  Like many, I'm tired of dirty politics, negative ads, ugly smear campaigns by PAC's that can air any kind of nasty attack ad they want (based on truth or not).  To me, this is all Hillary is: a say-anything, do-anything, win-at-any-cost candidate who doesn't care about the party or the constituents. 

I agree Tom -- I feel McCain also does that -- as evidenced by his request to the North Carolina GOP: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gxZidnkfsG30rvsK1O8u20me7 uaAD908HUK00

I do find it ironic that Chairman Howard Dean is criticizing McCain for speaking out against this type of  advertising by stating that if he cannot stop a segement of his party from running the ad how can he lead the country.  I am certain Mr. Dean does not want that standard reveresed if Mrs. Clinton is his party's nominee.  Has he criticized either Bill or Hillary Clinton for their mudslinging?